Posted 5 years ago on Oct. 29, 2012, 7:27 p.m. EST by Builder
(4202)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Haldane, who oversees the City for the central bank, said Occupy acted as a lever on policymakers despite criticism that its aims were too vague....

Speaking at a debate held by the Occupy Movement in central London, Haldane said regulations limiting credit use would undermine attempts by individuals to accumulate huge property and financial wealth at the expense of other members of society. Allowing banks to lend on a massive scale also drained funding from other industries, adding to the negative impact that unregulated banks had on the economy, he said.

The hard-hitting speech is unlikely to find a warm welcome in the Square Mile, which is keen for bank lending to recover to its heady pre-crisis levels and bring accompanying profits and commissions. Lending to individuals and corporations in the UK has fallen to a fraction of the levels seen in 2007 when few banks checked the income status of individual borrowers or the risks being taken by corporate customers before offering a loan. The Bank of England will impose stricter lending rules on banks next year when it takes over regulation of the industry from the Financial Services Authority.

Haldane said Occupy's voice had been "loud and persuasive" and that "policymakers have listened and are acting in ways which will close those fault-lines" with a "reformation of finance that Occupy has helped stir". He said inequality was fuelled by bank lending for speculation on property and other assets that enriched some in society at the expense of others.

"The asset-rich, in particular the owner-occupying rich, became a lot richer. Meanwhile, the asset-less and indebted fell further behind. In other words, the pre-crisis asset price bubble acted like a regressive tax," he said.

Earlier on, investors may not have realized to what extent that the bankers got them. With multiple economies weakening or still in the doldrums, those garbage debt instruments pushed out to them by bankers with impunity seem increasingly dubious. Yes, not only the poorer segments of society is now upset with the bankers - "bankster" as a financial term has actually become acceptable in establishment circles.

It will help the entire world when London, increasingly the financial hub of the world due to its time zone and location, cleans up its house because it can start the process of financial disarmament in earnest to the benefit of all.

Let us hope that it is not mere lip service. Regulations to make markets healthy, fair, and relevant are good. The Brits are more dependent on their finance sector than the U.S. so they are unlikely to go overboard on regulations so regulation is a good sign for the future health of their finance sector.

IMF is a heavyweight in finance so its exerting pressure to re-impose some semblance of rationality in banking can be helpful. EU protests against austerity measures can be helpful, too. It is too bad that many innocent people had to suffer because of the banksters. I was ready to give up and simply have the people eat the costs because I thought things were getting hopeless. If we all have to eat the costs sooner or later with bailouts past, present, and future, the best thing is to eat them now rather than later because the sooner we get the whole mess cleaned up, the faster we get back to more normal functioning of the economies to the benefit of all. It seems that the people may not have rolled over and played dead yet. Hurray! Power to the people around the world! We still have hope.

I share (and find) this info on several sites of public debate around the globe. On most of those sites, the general thought about #ows still adheres to the "hippy" happy camper theme, nurtured by the corporate media. I hear repeatedly that #ows is history. It never achieved anything.